[Qgis-psc] QGIS LTR releases -- is it time to pull the plug?

[Marco Bernasocchi]

Hi Anita, Hi Nyall, Hi All
I think that it is a good idea to allocate the first half hour (and more if
needed) in tonight's budget meeting to this very pressing subject.
Nyall, thanks a lot for your analysis, we'll use it as discussion base.

I extended the meeting invitation from 18:00 to 19:30.

See you later
Marco


On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 at 21:37, Anita Graser <anitagraser at gmx.at> wrote:

> Thank you Nyall for the candid assessment.
> I'm ready to help wherever I can, which most likely comes down to writing
> announcements.
> We had the budget meeting scheduled for Tuesday evening but it sounds like
> we should get on top of this issue asap.
>
> Regards
> Anita
>
> 15 Nov 2021 20:57:36 Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi lists,
> >
> > I'd like to start some conversation about the dire condition of the
> > QGIS LTR release and what we can do to remedy/avoid this in future.
> >
> > If you've missed the conversation, our QGIS 3.16 windows releases have
> > been completely broken for nearly a month now. 3.16.12 had a critical
> > issue which caused lockups in Python code, and now 3.16.13 has
> > completely broken projection handling (resulting in loss of CRS,
> > hangups when opening projects, etc).
> >
> > So what do we do? I can think of a few responses we could make:
> >
> > - Kill 3.16.13 with fire. It needs to be removed from the website and
> > all traces of the internet ASAP. Rollback to only offering 3.16.11,
> > which is the last good Windows 3.16 release.
> >
> > - Put out a massive apology (and ask users to step up their funding to
> > better maintain QGIS releases in future ;)
> >
> > - Mark 3.16 as an early EOL. (I can't see anyone interested in
> > resolving the actual issue, so we've no way forward here in releasing
> > a "good" 3.16 release again.)
> >
> > - Write the LTR releases off as a failed concept. (i.e. if we don't
> > have the resources to maintain them properly, we shouldn't be offering
> > them at all and should resort back to the single maintained release at
> > any one time situation.)
> >
> > - Lower the supported period of a LTR release to 6 months?
> >
> > - Offer "theoretical" LTR releases ONLY as source code, but leave it
> > to users to compile themselves and accept responsibility for their own
> > packaging of this release.
> >
> > - Go on a funding drive so that QGIS can **pay** a developer and
> > packager so that we actually CAN say we have stable LTR releases
> > again?
> >
> > - ...something else...?
> >
> > Suffice to say, these are big issues, with big responses. But we're
> > also under extreme time pressure here -- 3.16 is broken beyond belief,
> > and we DO need to make some public responses asap (i.e. TODAY!!!!)
> >
> > Nyall
> > _______________________________________________
> > Qgis-psc mailing list
> > Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>


-- 
Marco Bernasocchi

QGIS.org Chair
OPENGIS.ch CEO
http://berna.io
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20211116/967d688a/attachment.html>